Wednesday, May 23, 2012

This morning in the Chicago Sun-Times Fran Spielman reports that Chicago Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts is reaching out to the Chicago City Council's African American members in an effort to breath life into his request for public funds to help finance Wrigley Field renovations. Since the revelation that Joe Ricketts, patriarch of the family that owns the Cubs, was soliciting proposals to attack President Barack Obama, Tom Ricketts has been in damage control mode. As the New York Timesreported the plan presented to the Ricketts family (not just Joe, but Cubs shareholders Pete and Todd) used race in attempt to do political damage to the President. To me this outreach to African American Alderman is insulting for the following reasons:

Both Dan Bernstein (@dan_bernstein) and Steve Rosenbloom (@stevenrosenbloom) have made the allegation, with compelling evidence, that the Ricketts family is misleading about their father's role in Cubs ownership. If this allegation is true, why should anyone believe Tom Ricketts explanations and spin regarding the family backing of the racist attack on the Obama? Hopefully reporters, Alderman, Mayor Emanuel and anyone else that Tom reaches out will challenge him to fully explain Joe's involvement in Cubs ownership.

The New York Times also reported that the race baiting proposal was presented to Cubs shareholders Pete and Todd Ricketts. So while its great to separate Joe Ricketts from Cubs ownership, how does the family explain Pete and Todd's apparent participation in the solicitation of the racist proposal?

Why is Tom Ricketts only reaching to African American Aldermen? Is he of the belief that white and Hispanic Alderman weren't offended by his father's and brothers' efforts to launch a race based attack on President Obama? Shouldn't his outreach be to all Alderman?

Tom Rickets must think the African American Aldermen and the people of Chicago are fools. It is appalling that he is misleading everyone about his father's role in the ownership group, while at the same time ignoring the fact that his two brothers who are acknowledged Cubs shareholders were involved in this raced based plan to attack President Obama.

Thursday, May 17, 2012

Before the Ricketts' family dismisses the racist super pac proposal I have some question for Tom Ricketts that I would love local media and Mayor Emanuel to ask (provided he takes their calls). The questions are from the following passage in the New York Times article that exposed Tom Ricketts:

"The proposal was presented last week in Chicago to associates and family members of Mr. Ricketts, who is also the patriarch of the family that owns the Chicago Cubs."

What Ricketts' family members were there when the proposal was presented?

Were any of the Ricketts' family members that were present members of the Chicago Cubs ownership team?

While Tom Ricketts' condemned the racist plan after it was revealed that his father and other family members considered it, are any members of the Cubs ownership team on board with Joe Ricketts super pac and its efforts to unseat President Obama?

It easy to dismiss this as a misguided attempt by Joe Ricketts, but the article talks about Ricketts family members. Who are those family members and what are their roles with the Chicago Cubs? Might Tom be involved?

UPDATE: According to the New York Times the proposal was presented to two of Joe Ricketts's sons, it should be pointed out that all of the Ricketts' children are in the ownership group of the Chicago Cubs so it is absolutely fair to say that members of the Chicago Cubs ownership group sought to attack President Obama.

"The president and general counsel of the Ending Spending Political Action Fund, Brian Baker, said through a spokesman that the plan was submitted to a group that included him and two of Mr. Ricketts’s sons at a meeting in Chicago last week. 'I was surprised and troubled by what I saw,' he said. 'It was not what we asked for.'"

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

I hope every NATO protester/OCCUPY WALL STREET participant understands how bad their self righteous message, or lack thereof, is. Look at the NSFW comment from a "GANGBANGER*" observing an anti-police brutality rally:

"One gangbanger stood in front of the strip mall across the street from the police station and showed his solidarity with the neighbors who, on any other day, would just as soon hang him from a street lamp by his ankles. 'I agree with these guys: fuck the police,' the banger said, 'But where are these motherfuckers every other day of the year?'

'If I had to choose between the police and these motherfuckers, I'm riding with the police,' he added."

Think about that statement for a moment. It comes from a post in Chicagoist in which some protesters took to the streets in advance of the upcoming NATO summit in Chicago and marched through a number of working class white neighborhoods to protest police brutality. For any number of reasons the group that I most likely have more in common with is the protesters, however since the OWS movement began and as we prepare to welcome protesters for the NATO summit its a group that turns me off.

I applaud the OWS movement for drawing attention to the plight of the 99% and the reckless behavior on Wall Street but I cannot do much more than applaud them, I sure as hell don't want to join them.

Before thinking that the "gangbanger" is misguided I challenge the OWS/NATO summit protesters to ask themselves how they can improve their messaging so that the very folks they claim to support would appreciate their efforts.

*I am not sure what criteria the writer used to determine that this observer was a "gangbanger"

Tuesday, April 03, 2012

Originally when NBC first announced that Sarah Palin was going to be on THE TODAY SHOW on Saturday it gave the impression that she would would be a guest. Then sometime on Sunday it was announced that she was "co-hosting." Palin has been reluctant to appear or be interviewed on any outlet other than FOX, which she is compensated for, so you have to wonder if she demanded compensation from NBC. NBC NEWS probably has a policy not to pay for interviews, but it is most likely completely possible for them to pay her to

"co-host," especially if Palin is member of SAG/AFTRA (which could be possible because of her position with FOX).

So the question is, did NBC pay Palin to "co-host" THE TODAY SHOW? And if so, was this just a cleaver way to pay her for an interview? I hope Mediate, Media Matters, Howard Kurtz or anyone else with the interest and resources will further investigate.

Monday, March 19, 2012

Huffington Post and other media outlets are reporting that Bristol Palin feels that President Obama should call her or her mother just like he did Sandra Fluke after she was attacked by Rush Limbaugh. I agree. I have provided the following script for him:

"Hello Bristol, I wanted to call you and offer my encouragement to you. Since your mom is one of the most divisive people who has done everything in her power to divide us, your family has had to deal with some ugly things said about them, similar to the ugly things she has said about my family.

You became a target when you decided to exploit her notoriety to seek fame for than the fact that you are single mother with a jerk of baby daddy and famous mom. What has been said about you is awful. I appreciate your frustration, as you can imagine Michelle and I have had many folks, say ugly things about us, we can understand your frustration. However we understood that when we chose to be in the public eye, we were opening ourselves up to that.

Many young single mothers work hard, go to school and provide loving homes for their children without being made fun of by comedians. I should point out that these single mothers don't seek fame like you do. They don't act as spokespersons for abstinence campaigns, they don't go on Dancing With The Stars, they don't write books and they don't do reality shows. They just want to provide for their children.

I agree that we need to start treating people, especially those we don't agree with, better. You could start by telling your mom to shut up."Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Friday, February 17, 2012

@ericbolli­ng is nothing but a simple racist who regularly says racist stuff about President Obama, but given the conservati­ve/Republi­can/FOX NEWS embrace of racism he will not be held accountabl­e for his racist comments. Of course I expect my Republican­/conservat­ive friends to tell me there is something wrong with me for being offended by racism.Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Sunday, January 29, 2012

I don't doubt what Newt says, however any business that I learn is deliberate­ly not hiring because Obama is president is a business that I plan to boycott. Not out of loyalty to Obama, but loyalty to the working people of this country who are being held hostage by hatred of Obama.Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Sunday, January 22, 2012

On Saturday, January 21, 2012 during Newt Gingrich's victory rally in the South Carolina primary a Gingrich supporter can be heard shouting out "string him up" after President Obama is mentioned. Essentially the lynching of our nation's first African American President was encouraged during a Republican primary event. If Newt Gingrich is going to be taken seriously he needs to condemn this type of rhetoric.